These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

248 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27368370)

  • 1. Spatial measurement errors in the field of spatial epidemiology.
    Zhang Z; Manjourides J; Cohen T; Hu Y; Jiang Q
    Int J Health Geogr; 2016 Jul; 15(1):21. PubMed ID: 27368370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Geocoding Error, Spatial Uncertainty, and Implications for Exposure Assessment and Environmental Epidemiology.
    Kinnee EJ; Tripathy S; Schinasi L; Shmool JLC; Sheffield PE; Holguin F; Clougherty JE
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2020 Aug; 17(16):. PubMed ID: 32806682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Advances in spatial epidemiology and geographic information systems.
    Kirby RS; Delmelle E; Eberth JM
    Ann Epidemiol; 2017 Jan; 27(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 28081893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of two geocoding methods for geographic information system-based exposure assessment in epidemiological studies.
    Faure E; Danjou AM; Clavel-Chapelon F; Boutron-Ruault MC; Dossus L; Fervers B
    Environ Health; 2017 Feb; 16(1):15. PubMed ID: 28235407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Spatial error in geocoding physician location data from the AMA Physician Masterfile: implications for spatial accessibility analysis.
    McLafferty S; Freeman VL; Barrett RE; Luo L; Shockley A
    Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol; 2012 Apr; 3(1):31-8. PubMed ID: 22469489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quantifying the magnitude of environmental exposure misclassification when using imprecise address proxies in public health research.
    Healy MA; Gilliland JA
    Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol; 2012 Apr; 3(1):55-67. PubMed ID: 22469491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Comparison of Google and Yahoo applications for geocoding of postal addresses in epidemiological studies].
    Quesada JA; Nolasco A; Moncho J
    Rev Esp Salud Publica; 2013; 87(2):201-6. PubMed ID: 23775108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Modeling the probability distribution of positional errors incurred by residential address geocoding.
    Zimmerman DL; Fang X; Mazumdar S; Rushton G
    Int J Health Geogr; 2007 Jan; 6():1. PubMed ID: 17214903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Error propagation models to examine the effects of geocoding quality on spatial analysis of individual-level datasets.
    Zandbergen PA; Hart TC; Lenzer KE; Camponovo ME
    Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol; 2012 Apr; 3(1):69-82. PubMed ID: 22469492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Spatial Heterogeneity in Positional Errors: A Comparison of Two Residential Geocoding Efforts in the Agricultural Health Study.
    Fisher JA; Spaur M; Buller ID; Flory AR; Beane Freeman LE; Hofmann JN; Giangrande M; Jones RR; Ward MH
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Feb; 18(4):. PubMed ID: 33572119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Positional accuracy and geographic bias of four methods of geocoding in epidemiologic research.
    Schootman M; Sterling DA; Struthers J; Yan Y; Laboube T; Emo B; Higgs G
    Ann Epidemiol; 2007 Jun; 17(6):464-70. PubMed ID: 17448683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A research agenda: does geocoding positional error matter in health GIS studies?
    Jacquez GM
    Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol; 2012 Apr; 3(1):7-16. PubMed ID: 22469487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Impacts of geocoding quality in environmental epidemiology studies: two case-studies in Tuscany Region (Central Italy)].
    Nuvolone D; Santini M; Pepe P; Cipriani F
    Epidemiol Prev; 2016; 40(1):44-50. PubMed ID: 26951701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Geographic information systems: their use in environmental epidemiologic research.
    Vine MF; Degnan D; Hanchette C
    Environ Health Perspect; 1997 Jun; 105(6):598-605. PubMed ID: 9288494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Uncertainty in geospatial health: challenges and opportunities ahead.
    Delmelle EM; Desjardins MR; Jung P; Owusu C; Lan Y; Hohl A; Dony C
    Ann Epidemiol; 2022 Jan; 65():15-30. PubMed ID: 34656750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluating heterogeneity in indoor and outdoor air pollution using land-use regression and constrained factor analysis.
    Levy JI; Clougherty JE; Baxter LK; Houseman EA; Paciorek CJ;
    Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2010 Dec; (152):5-80; discussion 81-91. PubMed ID: 21409949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Using geographic information systems for exposure assessment in environmental epidemiology studies.
    Nuckols JR; Ward MH; Jarup L
    Environ Health Perspect; 2004 Jun; 112(9):1007-15. PubMed ID: 15198921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The spatial epidemiologic (r)evolution: a look back in time and forward to the future.
    Carpenter TE
    Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol; 2011 Sep; 2(3):119-24. PubMed ID: 22748171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Error and bias in determining exposure potential of children at school locations using proximity-based GIS techniques.
    Zandbergen PA; Green JW
    Environ Health Perspect; 2007 Sep; 115(9):1363-70. PubMed ID: 17805429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Spatial analysis for epidemiology.
    Graham AJ; Atkinson PM; Danson FM
    Acta Trop; 2004 Aug; 91(3):219-25. PubMed ID: 15246928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.